Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think the clear intention of the Community article is that, yeah, you can bring a Skyrunner with laser lance and fusion gun, and then you would use the updated rules for banshee masks and Path of Command. The point is to make sure that models aren't rendered illegal.

That said I don't think that it's worth spending too much time worrying about this. The situation with Autarchs is the first time this codex vs index question has been so prominent, and I would expect it to be addressed in the usual week 2 FAQ.

popisdead wrote:

ryzouken wrote:
He falls under the table of special characters in the points section, if nothing else.

That points section isn't enough to argue a generic instance is unique.

Does 40k have "you may only take on instance of this warscroll" like AoS? That would be your indicator if nothing else.

You can only have one Avatar of Khaine in your army, just like you can have only one Eldrad.

Joey86 wrote:About the Avatar.
He is not THE Avatar of Khaela Mensha Khaine. Instead he is
A Avatar of Khaela Mensha Khaine.

"an" But this is correct. You cannot have 2 Yvrainnes, you could have a Lugganeth Avatar and an Ulthwe Avatar both being distinct. That alone should pretty much stop people thinking he is a named character.

No. You can't have more than one Avatar of Khaine. In the fluff you could, but fluff isn't rules.

Cream Tea wrote:, and most people seem to agree. ."

The problem is that is the vocal minority weighing in and I wouldn't take that to a game and explain it to my opponent that "I found some people on the net that agree with me".

Right. The same goes for the other interpretation. None of them is unquestionably the right one, because GW didn't write the rules clearly enough. More people agreeing with one interpretation means two players are more likely to agree to play it that way though.

The argument I'm seeing is this weird "cherry pick" where you can take the Codex Autarch w/Wings, and then "transfer" the weapon options from the Index (e.g. Reaper Launcher) but pay the points listed in the Codex, kind of a hybrid. All based on this "Rifleman Dread" thing they said in an FAQ at the start of 8th, something about how you could use the codex entry but index weapon options at codex points, which is an even more convoluted gray area.

I think for the health of the game they're going to need to firmly state that no, you can only use the Codex (but you could always house-rule that you can take both) to establish a baseline; it will piss people off because it would mean for Matched Play (i.e. the default) you can't use those old models, but otherwise it's this nebulous you can take X from the Codex but pick Y options from the Index that no longer exist in the Codex area that will just lead to confusion and abuse.

I wouldn't be surprised if tournament organizers or pick up games follow the same line of thought and allow only entries in the latest codex (FAQ, Chapter Approved).

Eventually the indexes will be phased out and only codexes will remain, either way I look, I feel the days of older profiles are numbered.

Wayniac wrote:
The argument I'm seeing is this weird "cherry pick" where you can take the Codex Autarch w/Wings, and then "transfer" the weapon options from the Index (e.g. Reaper Launcher) but pay the points listed in the Codex, kind of a hybrid. All based on this "Rifleman Dread" thing they said in an FAQ at the start of 8th, something about how you could use the codex entry but index weapon options at codex points, which is an even more convoluted gray area.

I think for the health of the game they're going to need to firmly state that no, you can only use the Codex (but you could always house-rule that you can take both) to establish a baseline; it will piss people off because it would mean for Matched Play (i.e. the default) you can't use those old models, but otherwise it's this nebulous you can take X from the Codex but pick Y options from the Index that no longer exist in the Codex area that will just lead to confusion and abuse.

Abuse... like an Aliatoc Autarch with a Reaper Launcher and Mark of the Incomparable Hunter and the Spiritshroud of Alanssair sitting next to Illic Nightspear? This thought was probably what quelled a lot of my outrage over the lack of kitting for Autarchs.

Yeah, kitting Autarches. Pretty much any option except bike autarch was bad, recently people used autarch with reaper-ml for free re-rolls and that's it. Any other option but Yriel just wouldn't do much in combat except re-rolls.

Now you have a foot guy with S6 halberd who can grab relic wing for free and move '12 and Fly and still ride in serpent, a guy with fusion pistol, with deep strike who can take any of the murderswords in relics and actually do something in combat, a jetbike autarch with selection of all the melees murderswords or murderpikes you would ever want and you can slap -1 to hit on top of all that if you really want to. All this can be then further augmented with things like MOAR re-rolls to everyone, an auto pass of morale within '6, or even MOAR KP regeneration. Hell, you can even create a sniper with fusion gun on a jetbike shooting enemy characters.

I gotta miss an autarch with scorpion sword and spider's "roll 2 and die" backpack so much, eh?

OK, so as I see it there are a couple big common questions around at the moment:

- Can you take the Autarch with Warp Generator, or an Autarch on foot with various index weapon options?

- And if so, which Banshee Mask rule does that Autarch use?

- Is the Avatar a "named character"?

I am refraining from putting anything in the tactica FAQ regarding any of these, as there is no firm answer for it other than my own interpretation, and I'm *hoping* that at least one of these will be answered in the first official FAQ.

But from previous things that GW did for the other Codices, the Autarch with Jump Generator should definitely be a valid option, as he is an actual Datasheet that has no update. Chaos Lords on Juggernauts are here to say "this is fine, folks!"

Also, the Avatar is -technically- not a named character. There's no rule or implication that says he has a name. Avatar is a generic description, like 'Wraithlord'. He isn't "Avatar Greg".

However, I fully expect that he is -supposed- to be a named character. They probably intended to put "Unique Characters", but put named instead because GW don't proof read their books lol.

This is just my interpretations though, so I won't be putting anything in the FAQ just yet. Hope the official errata come up soon.


+++++Transmission Interrupted++++++
+++++++++Tactica Update++++++++++

OK so just to let you know, I've had an issue with the backend I was using for the tactica. Nothing ground-breaking, but it was just making my life difficult and wasn't looking all that great. So I'm changing it.

The current tactica will be remaining in place while I duplicate the content into the new backend I'm using (shouldn't take long, I've already done half of it).

However there might be a (hopefully brief) time while the tactica is unavailable. I mean, the website will still work, but it'll look broken. Probably.

Just thought I'd pass that along. I'll update when it's all been done.

+++++++Transmission End+++++++++++++

I've changed my opinion here is the link to the community article: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

And here is a quote fro. The article (On phone so forgive formatting).
There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?
A.While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Q.Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.


So you use the datasheets from the index and points from the codex. So if your using index autarch you have to use the index banshee max but codex price for the model and wargear.

You also get to use all the tactics and stratagem where appropriate. Honestly they were pretty clear. Even more so as the banshee mask rules are on the models index datasheet. Even more his path of command is on his datasheet. This can change with the faq, bu5 assuming anymore I feel like your reaching

Did another couple tests with Shining Spears recently. I love these things. The Quicken bomb is just devastating. Even small 3-man units deployed on the table were working out great. As Alatoic, they're actually quite durable. They're about as durable as non- Raven Guard tactical Marines in cover against Earthshakers, for example. They're almost twice as durable per point as Dire Avengers against small arms fire. That's not even considering the free extra wound on the Exarch. And then even at 12" they still shoot 77% as well as Avengers. It is totally worth it to advance to get them into laser lance range instead of hiding because you can't get close enough to charge. At 6" they expect to kill 47% of their cost in tactical Marines through shooting alone. Of course, charging is great -- they expect to kill 84% of their cost in tactical Marines if they get to charge.

Playing around with them also reminded me that mathhammer efficiency often understates a unit's real effectiveness because you're rarely attacking naked Guardsmen or Marines, and then you can also force morale tests (buffed by Hemlocks even). Yeah, a Spear only expects to kill 39% of its cost in naked Infantry when it shoots and charges, but if the squad you're killing has 10 points in upgrades then it's closer to 50%, and if you only need to kill 8 models to force the rest to run then this is more like 60%.

It gets pretty silly when you consider the Exarch too. A 95 point 3-man squad that shoots and charges naked tactical Marines expects to kill 94% of its points. It expects to do 9.3 wounds to a T7 3+ vehicle or monster (which are typically paying 10 ppw minimum).

Purifying Tempest wrote:

Spartacus wrote:
I have recently taken the plunge and purchased a Scorpion Heavy Grav Tank (what a moron )

Mostly for a painting project, but I know I will eventually bring it against my friends LOW's. Ill keep it mostly stock in game but obviously Spirit Stones for 10 points is a no brainer.

Can anyone think of any stratagem/psychic/other shenanigans when using a Super Heavy Tank with such a gratuitous amount of firepower? All I can think of is perhaps using Cloudstrike to shield it from a turn 1 beating, and it would obviously be a hilarious candidate for the Forewarned stratagem, with the ability to pretty much auto-delete an enemy deepstriker of your choice when next to a Farseer. As far as I can tell it meets the keyword requisites to use these stratagems at least.

At a glance: Guide, Doom, Jinx, and Phatasm all seem decent things to get more out of the tank.

Guide to make sure those high cost shots land, especially if it is alpha struck but not killed.

Doom because... it is probably the best spell in Runes of Fate... poke a unit, press delete key.

Jinx will help to soften irritating invulnerable saves.

You can also split Doom and Jinx to give the super heavy two targets to split fire.

Phantasm allows you to deploy in X configuration, and then decide to move your Farseer + Super Heavy tank close together to leverage Forewarned to counter deep striking units that can threaten the Scorpion.

I'm pretty sure Forewarned allows any Asuryani unit within 6" of the Farseer to fire. Phantasm allows up to whatever number of Asuryani to redeploy after setup. Unfortunately, the buffing side of Runes of Battle seem largely restricted to Infantry/Biker units, meaning you'll have to leverage the debuffing side to get some mileage out of Warlocks.

Don't think the Scorpion can split fire. It's one weapon with 4d6 shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wayniac wrote:
Image:

Spoiler:

So this would mean that you could always choose to use the index datasheet with the codex points values even when the codex overrides an entry in the index (as the Autarch does). Even if the codex has an updated entry, you can opt to use the index version instead. So, going by that logic, if you don't like the recent change to Commissars, you can just use the index datasheet instead. If, in the future, you dislike how they changed a unit, you can use the index version instead.

That's not what this says, even if it is correct. Commissar can use index gear, but not index rules.

Dionysodorus wrote:
It gets pretty silly when you consider the Exarch too. A 95 point 3-man squad that shoots and charges naked tactical Marines expects to kill 94% of its points. It expects to do 9.3 wounds to a T7 3+ vehicle or monster (which are typically paying 10 ppw minimum).

And they cost like, whole 3 points more than scatbikes per model. It's idiotic, I don't understand this.

popisdead wrote:

ryzouken wrote:
He falls under the table of special characters in the points section, if nothing else.

That points section isn't enough to argue a generic instance is unique.

Why the heck not? It literally identifies him as a special character. Barring a FAQ, that's the preponderance of evidence.

 Shadenuat wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
It gets pretty silly when you consider the Exarch too. A 95 point 3-man squad that shoots and charges naked tactical Marines expects to kill 94% of its points. It expects to do 9.3 wounds to a T7 3+ vehicle or monster (which are typically paying 10 ppw minimum).

And they cost like, whole 3 points more than scatbikes per model. It's idiotic, I don't understand this.

Definitly agree, got to get in a small game and the spears rock it up!! The scat laser should be something like maybe 7 or 8 points each. Can't really make the wind rider cheaper as the wind rider is basicly 2 dire avengers but faster, tougher, and with fly. So what do you do?/?

What do you guys think of vypers. I kind of want to pick up a set of three this way i can use that 20" move to get an early charge or to soak up overwatch for the shining spear bomb, or one of my small shining spear squads.

xmbk wrote:

popisdead wrote:

ryzouken wrote:
He falls under the table of special characters in the points section, if nothing else.

That points section isn't enough to argue a generic instance is unique.

Why the heck not? It literally identifies him as a special character. Barring a FAQ, that's the preponderance of evidence.

There is nothing in the book that defines what a 'named character' (save Prince Yriel), and nothing in the book that specifies the Avatar as one. Moreover, GW's own marketing people have been promoting the Avatar as such (which, not being an official source for rules, means nothing from a rules standpoint, but does emphasize the ambiguities in those rules).

You can have one Avatar in your army. That is the only restriction currently placed upon him by RAW.

++++ Another Tactica Update+++

As always, these things got more complicated than expected. I solved the problem, but it's now very very late so I can't finish the job. So half the site is going to be offline for 24 hours. Apologies.

 Fafnir wrote:

xmbk wrote:

popisdead wrote:

ryzouken wrote:
He falls under the table of special characters in the points section, if nothing else.

That points section isn't enough to argue a generic instance is unique.

Why the heck not? It literally identifies him as a special character. Barring a FAQ, that's the preponderance of evidence.

There is nothing in the book that defines what a 'named character' (save Prince Yriel), and nothing in the book that specifies the Avatar as one. Moreover, GW's own marketing people have been promoting the Avatar as such (which, not being an official source for rules, means nothing from a rules standpoint, but does emphasize the ambiguities in those rules).

You can have one Avatar in your army. That is the only restriction currently placed upon him by RAW.

Nothing, other than listing him as one in the points section. I do not think nothing means what you think it means.

xmbk wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

xmbk wrote:

popisdead wrote:

ryzouken wrote:
He falls under the table of special characters in the points section, if nothing else.

That points section isn't enough to argue a generic instance is unique.

Why the heck not? It literally identifies him as a special character. Barring a FAQ, that's the preponderance of evidence.

There is nothing in the book that defines what a 'named character' (save Prince Yriel), and nothing in the book that specifies the Avatar as one. Moreover, GW's own marketing people have been promoting the Avatar as such (which, not being an official source for rules, means nothing from a rules standpoint, but does emphasize the ambiguities in those rules).

You can have one Avatar in your army. That is the only restriction currently placed upon him by RAW.

Nothing, other than listing him as one in the points section. I do not think nothing means what you think it means.

Look at the codex. What does the heading in the points section where he's listed say?

I had an amusing idea which I believe is sound rules wise:

Deploy a shooty infantry unit using the Webway Strike stratagem, shoot with it, then use the fire and fade stratagem to embark on a Wave Serpent that has advanced up behind it.

I usually end my turn 1 with a Serpent full of Fire Dragons having gone full speed towards the enemy, for 2cp those fire Dragons can have already had a round of shooting. The serpent only needs to be within 10 inches (7 for fire and fade move + 3 embark distance) of the unit which should be quite easy after advancing.


I imagine it to be like Legolas jumping on the horse in LOTR, except with melta guns and grav tanks.

An idea I like is having a 20 man guardian defender squad with two Shuriken Cannons webway striking in.

You can deepstrike them so they are all in range, into cover if it is available (2+ save on the heavy weapon platforms in cover). These guys can also take up a huge footprint. Blocking off part of the board, objective securing objectives if needed.

With Alaitoc providing you can wipe out anything within 12" you are a lot more durable. Also realistically your opponent can only get so many units within 12" so these are a real pain for your opponent to deal with. Using at the right time can really throw a spanner in the works for your opponent


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For Autarchs if you are running as a warlord to get a roll for each CP you use you will want to deploy first before spending any CP on things like cloudstrike and webway assault. I think you won't be able to roll if you spend on things like extra relics? As these occur before deployment and the rule only works if he is on the table not in transport I believe

mmimzie wrote:
What do you guys think of vypers.

I think they're better alternative to windriders too. The price gap between vyper with 2 shuriken cannons and 2 windriders with same is just too small to validate using regular bikes.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:

I had an amusing idea which I believe is sound rules wise:

Deploy a shooty infantry unit using the Webway Strike stratagem, shoot with it, then use the fire and fade stratagem to embark on a Wave Serpent that has advanced up behind it.

I usually end my turn 1 with a Serpent full of Fire Dragons having gone full speed towards the enemy, for 2cp those fire Dragons can have already had a round of shooting. The serpent only needs to be within 10 inches (7 for fire and fade move + 3 embark distance) of the unit which should be quite easy after advancing.


I imagine it to be like Legolas jumping on the horse in LOTR, except with melta guns and grav tanks.

Even better. Can use it with ynnari dark reapers. Fire twice then fire and fade into the serpent to fire twice again. Pretty decent trick.
Also looking at the possibility of just deploying them on the board and fire and fading into the wave serpent, or if you go second phantasm to redeploy them into the wave serpent.

 Korlandril wrote:
An idea I like is having a 20 man guardian defender squad with two Shuriken Cannons webway striking in.

You can deepstrike them so they are all in range, into cover if it is available (2+ save on the heavy weapon platforms in cover). These guys can also take up a huge footprint. Blocking off part of the board, objective securing objectives if needed.

With Alaitoc providing you can wipe out anything within 12" you are a lot more durable. Also realistically your opponent can only get so many units within 12" so these are a real pain for your opponent to deal with. Using at the right time can really throw a spanner in the works for your opponent


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For Autarchs if you are running as a warlord to get a roll for each CP you use you will want to deploy first before spending any CP on things like cloudstrike and webway assault. I think you won't be able to roll if you spend on things like extra relics? As these occur before deployment and the rule only works if he is on the table not in transport I believe

I don't see much value in cannons over catapults. Ether bright lance or star cannon makes the most sense. Or no weapons at all. Actually thinking about it - weapons platforms are the least effiecent place to put weapons because an 8 point gardian can't shoot - essentially that weapon is costing you +8 points to it's actual cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadenuat wrote:

mmimzie wrote:
What do you guys think of vypers.

I think they're better alternative to windriders too. The price gap between vyper with 2 shuriken cannons and 2 windriders with same is just too small to validate using regular bikes.

Vyper costs 70 wthi 2x SC
5 Swooping hawks costs64

I think these are our best fast attack options.

I think there's something to be said for bubble wrapping your opponent with webway strike guardians. Drop in 20 in a line 9" away from the enemies DZ and throw some defensive buffs on (conceal, fortune, protect + force field strat for 3++). your opponent can't move past unless they can fly. It would really mess up a rhino rush type list. it's only 140pts for 20 stomies.

xmbk wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

xmbk wrote:

popisdead wrote:

ryzouken wrote:
He falls under the table of special characters in the points section, if nothing else.

That points section isn't enough to argue a generic instance is unique.

Why the heck not? It literally identifies him as a special character. Barring a FAQ, that's the preponderance of evidence.

There is nothing in the book that defines what a 'named character' (save Prince Yriel), and nothing in the book that specifies the Avatar as one. Moreover, GW's own marketing people have been promoting the Avatar as such (which, not being an official source for rules, means nothing from a rules standpoint, but does emphasize the ambiguities in those rules).

You can have one Avatar in your army. That is the only restriction currently placed upon him by RAW.

Nothing, other than listing him as one in the points section. I do not think nothing means what you think it means.

You should check your codex. The points section lists him as a "Unit", not a named character.

Niiru wrote:

You should check your codex. The points section lists him as a "Unit", not a named character.

That's a valid point. That section doesn't specify they are all named character. If anything, that section is all the units that their point cost INCLUDES wargear, that way they don't have to give arbitrary point costs to things like the Wailing Doom.

Wayniac wrote:
The argument I'm seeing is this weird "cherry pick" where you can take the Codex Autarch w/Wings, and then "transfer" the weapon options from the Index (e.g. Reaper Launcher) but pay the points listed in the Codex, kind of a hybrid.

The way I see most of it, just from basic interpretation of "you can use the index where a unit is not in the codex", boils down to what "a unit" means.

If the unit has an identically named entry in the codex, you can not use the index.

So, as example, you have Autarch, Autarch with Wings and Autarch with Jump Generator, the first 2 are in the Codex, so you are compelled to use the codex entry, the last one you use the Index for, but with Codex points costs.


Just my logical interpretation, excluding any FAQs, GW input on the matter or any other legitimately established interpretations and rules.

Fictional wrote:

The way I see most of it, just from basic interpretation of "you can use the index where a unit is not in the codex", boils down to what "a unit" means.

If the unit has an identically named entry in the codex, you can not use the index.

So, as example, you have Autarch, Autarch with Wings and Autarch with Jump Generator, the first 2 are in the Codex, so you are compelled to use the codex entry, the last one you use the Index for, but with Codex points costs.


Just my logical interpretation, excluding any FAQs, GW input on the matter or any other legitimately established interpretations and rules.

From https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/:

There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.

(emphasis mine)
They're clearly calling out not just datasheets that aren't in the codex, but wargear options and such too. However, they then go on to basically contradict themselves in the same article:

The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books. You can certainly use units with updated datasheets alongside units from the index that have yet to be updated. Once a unit has been covered in the codex though, we assume you’re using the latest version.

Fictional wrote:

The way I see most of it, just from basic interpretation of "you can use the index where a unit is not in the codex", boils down to what "a unit" means.

If the unit has an identically named entry in the codex, you can not use the index.

So, as example, you have Autarch, Autarch with Wings and Autarch with Jump Generator, the first 2 are in the Codex, so you are compelled to use the codex entry, the last one you use the Index for, but with Codex points costs.


Just my logical interpretation, excluding any FAQs, GW input on the matter or any other legitimately established interpretations and rules.

I agree with this. It also makes it easier to explain to non-Eldar players.

So if you want to use that Reaper-launcher kitted Autarch, it'd better be the Jump Generator one from the Index.
If you had a Winged or Skyrunner Autarch with Reaper Launcher, you either ignore it, or cut it off.

-

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
An idea I like is having a 20 man guardian defender squad with two Shuriken Cannons webway striking in.

You can deepstrike them so they are all in range, into cover if it is available (2+ save on the heavy weapon platforms in cover). These guys can also take up a huge footprint. Blocking off part of the board, objective securing objectives if needed.

With Alaitoc providing you can wipe out anything within 12" you are a lot more durable. Also realistically your opponent can only get so many units within 12" so these are a real pain for your opponent to deal with. Using at the right time can really throw a spanner in the works for your opponent

I don't see much value in cannons over catapults. Ether bright lance or star cannon makes the most sense. Or no weapons at all. Actually thinking about it - weapons platforms are the least effiecent place to put weapons because an 8 point gardian can't shoot - essentially that weapon is costing you +8 points to it's actual cost.

The value in Cannons is you can shoot them after deepstriking with no penalty and they are the cheapest. The idea of them is to massively boost the guardians defence because they are 3+ and 2+ if in cover. This means your opponent has to waste higher AP weaponary or more lower ap on them. So you are wrong they are not a waste as they are a way of increasing the survivability of the squad.

Bright lances would be a waste as only two shots and they are quite expensive and hitting on 4+ on turn they deepstrike. Star Cannons might be a good choice as they are only adding 10 pts to the unit in question but again suffer from -1 to hit and you want to be soaking up wounds with them not relying on them for hitting power.

I can see value if you Guide them though. I like the potential of 20x2 Alaitoc Guardians + Farseer module.